Ugandan MPs in move to defer elections to 2021

Ugandan parliament in session. There are plans to extend their current term in office. Photo/FILE

By GAAKI KIGAMBO Special CorrespondentPosted
Saturday, March 22
2014 at
18:19

In Summary

Sources in the political circles said the split has amplified the MPs’ worries that their already slim chances of re-election might be completely eroded should their man not come out on top.

For opposition and civil society groups, this could potentially be the cost of unintended consequences, they could end up paying for the comprehensive electoral reforms that they have consistently demanded the government to carry out to guarantee a level playing field for free and fair elections.

Those who want the elections deferred cite other key expensive national exercises that are packed inside the remaining 24 months to the polls.

A proposal some legislators are quietly pushing to defer the 2016 General Election to 2021 could inadvertently gain stimulus from the row between President Yoweri Museveni and Prime Minister Amama Mbabazi.

Sources in the political circles said the split has amplified the MPs’ worries that their already slim chances of re-election might be completely eroded should their man not come out on top.

This reality has given rise to the idea of an extension, which is being justified as necessary to make time for electoral reforms.

For opposition and civil society groups, this could potentially be the cost of unintended consequences, they could end up paying for the comprehensive electoral reforms that they have consistently demanded the government to carry out to guarantee a level playing field for free and fair elections.

Kafeero Ssekitoleko, an Independent MP who has become the face of the proposal to put off the elections, says while fears of re-election could be true for some MPs, they represent a minority and their worries are not the foremost reason for a Bill that is likely to come out of the proposal.

“Opposition parties have always argued and agitated for electoral reforms. They keep saying the ground is not level and so they can never win any election until that ground is levelled. Knowing that the government is keen to listen to even minority voices, this is an issue that needs to be resolved once and for all. But, if you are to review the constitution to address matters of election, you definitely need time,” Mr Ssekitoleko argued.

He said those arguing that only a short period is required to make the necessary electoral reforms seem unaware that it is not only the electoral landscape which needs review but over 60 per cent of the Constitution’s provisions.

“Whenever we are working we encounter all sorts of lacunas. If we have a chance of reviewing the Constitution, let’s do it once and for all. The piecemeal reviews will not work. We will be wasting time when we could do the work once and for all,” he said.

Those who want the elections deferred cite other key expensive national exercises that are packed inside the remaining 24 months to the polls.

They include a general review of the Constitution, conducting a national census, and rolling out the national ID, which together with the elections, require at least Ush1.5 trillion ($581 million).

They say the government cannot fund all the activities, especially now that its partners are closing their taps over the homosexuality law. Civil society groups have strongly rejected the proposal.

“Regular, free and fair elections are commanded by our Constitution and are the platform through which we as Ugandans mandate those who will provide leadership and serve this country. Any proposals that undermine this social contract between our leaders and us will be resisted by all means as commanded by our Constitution,” reads a joint statement from three civil society groupings.

They discredit the reason given for the proposal, saying that not only has the government repeatedly boasted of relying on donors for only a fraction of its budget, it is inconceivable that it had planned to cover the costs of all these exercises using donor money.

Bishop Zac Niringiye, an advocate of good governance, accuses the State of deliberately distorting the message on free and fair elections.